We wanted there to be a mathematical consistency to the logo, really pulling it together into one coherent mark.

If there is one sentence in the entire blog post that tells the whole story, that is it. This shows that not only does she lack an understanding of design — which is fine, it's not where her strengths lie — but that she also doesn't know it; that designers consulted were unable to disabuse her of this ridiculous notion; and that the final result pleased her, when it is obviously flawed in this regard.

The only type designs that are "mathematically consistent" are used for computer-readable purposes, such as fonts developed to be magnetically scanned off checks. All other faces, including monospaced faces used in text editors or for developing software and ones that simulate monospaced or proportionately spaced typewriter letters, are designed for optical consistency.

I'm not trained in design, so while I can look at the logo and know that I hate it, I can't necessarily describe exactly why. Fleishman has provided an excellent interpretation of this.